Hail Holy Queen......

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Tom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tell it like it is Catholic Tom:thumbsup: God Bless

PS you need to put this on what does scripture say about Mary thread,there has been an antagonist on there 😃
 
So…all that said, this was what all “Christians” believed everywhere, and it is the catholic (universal) faith. I think thats enough proof for you…its up to you to pray to God to open your heart. There is an element of faith in thatyou may not understand everything, but you believe, thats what faith is…and thats what Jesus showed us.
 
Catholic Tom:
Mary as Ark of the New Covenant

Mary - the Immaculate Ark of the New Covenant
From Matthew Henry’s Commentary:

1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: 2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. 3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. 4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. 5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. 6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days…
Here we see that early prophecy eminently fulfilled in which God said he would put enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, Gen. iii. 15. You will observe,
Code:
  I. The attempts of Satan and his agents to prevent the increase of the church, by devouring her offspring *as soon as it was born;* of this we have a very lively description in the most proper images.

  1. We see how the church is represented in this vision. (1.) As a *woman,* the weaker part of the world, but the spouse of Christ, and the mother of the saints. (2.) As *clothed with the sun,* the imputed righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ. Having put on Christ, who is *the Sun of righteousness,* she, by her relation to Christ, is invested with honourable rights and privileges, and shines in his rays. (3.) As having *the moon under her feet* (that is, the world); she stands upon it, but lives above it; her heart and hope are not set upon sublunary things, but on the things that are in heaven, where her head is. (4.) As having on her head *a crown of twelve stars,* that is, the doctrine of the gospel preached by the twelve apostles, which is a crown of glory to all true believers. (5.) As in travail, crying out, and *pained to be delivered.* She was pregnant, and now in pain to bring forth a holy progeny to Christ, desirous that what was begun in the conviction of sinners might end in their conversion, that when the children were brought to the birth there might be strength to bring forth, and that she might see of the travail of her soul.

  2. How the grand enemy of the church is represented. (1.) As a *great red dragon*--a dragon for strength and terror--a red dragon for fierceness and cruelty. (2.) As *having seven heads,* that is, placed on seven hills, as Rome was; and therefore it is probable that pagan Rome is here meant. (3.) As having *ten horns,* divided into ten provinces, as the Roman empire was by Augustus CĂŚsar. (4.) As having *seven crowns upon his head,* which is afterwards expounded to be seven kings, [ xvii. 10*ch.*](http://bible.gospelcom.net/bible?version=KJV&passage=Re+17:10). (5.) As drawing with his tail a *third part of the stars in heaven,* and *casting them down to the earth,* turning the ministers and professors of the Christian religion out of their places and privileges and making them as weak and useless as he could. (6.) As standing *before the woman, to devour her child as soon as it should be born,* very vigilant to crush the Christian religion in its birth and entirely to prevent the growth and continuance of it in the world."
We could do this all day long if you want. You provide 10 posts from a Catholic source and I provide 10 posts from a Protestant source. That’s not really helpful.

I would rather see chunk by chunk. There’s no way one can have dialogue with such a collection of information. I’m assuming that dialogue was not your intent. The intent was to create a platform to blast your views and leave it hopelessly in the hands of the recipients to painstakingly disprove your thesis point by point. Not going to happen.

Peace…
 
Catholic Tom:
So…all that said, this was what all “Christians” believed everywhere, and it is the catholic (universal) faith. I think thats enough proof for you…its up to you to pray to God to open your heart. There is an element of faith in thatyou may not understand everything, but you believe, thats what faith is…and thats what Jesus showed us.
So, you set up a question, wait till you get 90 posts of answers to let everyone debate and then you post several posts in a row with your answer and say - “okay, that’s it”. You haven’t debated anything on your thread. You’ve let others do the work and come in at the last minute and drop a bombshell.

By the way, I’ve seen this same exact information on another thread a while back. All you’ve given is out of context Scripture that doesn’t include any language that equates Mary as “Queen of Heaven”. You started backwards. You began with a premise then went and found the information to back up your premise.

Peace…
 
Catholic Tom:
So…all that said, this was what all “Christians” believed everywhere, and it is the catholic (universal) faith. I think thats enough proof for you…its up to you to pray to God to open your heart. There is an element of faith in thatyou may not understand everything, but you believe, thats what faith is…and thats what Jesus showed us.
No, let’s discuss it. Don’t hide behind a preformed source of information. Think for yourself and get back to me.

Peace…
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
So, you set up a question, wait till you get 90 posts of answers to let everyone debate and then you post several posts in a row with your answer and say - “okay, that’s it”. You haven’t debated anything on your thread. You’ve let others do the work and come in at the last minute and drop a bombshell.

By the way, I’ve seen this same exact information on another thread a while back. All you’ve given is out of context Scripture that doesn’t include any language that equates Mary as “Queen of Heaven”. You started backwards. You began with a premise then went and found the information to back up your premise.

Peace…
Whatever your signature shows how seriously we should take any objections or refutations you have:p BUDDHA:whacky: No wonder you can’t understand God Bless
 
40.png
Lisa4Catholics:
Whatever your signature shows how seriously we should take any objections or refutations you have:p BUDDHA:whacky: No wonder you can’t understand God Bless
Just the facts, ma’am, just the facts. I’ve been a Baptist Christian for 32 years and know my positions well. Buddha has nothing to do with that. Any objections or refutations should be dealt with on their own merits, not the merit of the individual.

I don’t object to your being a Catholic because your views are different than mine. You are a wonderful person I’m sure. That has nothing to do with your beliefs.

Look at it this way - if nothing else - you get to hone your apologetic skills and get to see the other side of the fence if only briefly.🙂

Peace…
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
His mother is/was a human. Christ was/is human and divine. There is no correlation between the earthly institution of a monarchy and the Godhead. It’s an easy logic chain if you want to build that bridge. However you and the others have still not given one shred of evidence from Scripture that declares Mary as Queen of heaven and that she should be prayed to or that she is an Advocate with the Father.

Please show me evidence.
Didn’t He give His Church the authority …“whatever bound on earth also bound in Heaven”? How can such earthly institution bind things in Heaven 😉

We are bound to His Church’s teaching which includes the Scripture AND the Apostolic Oral Tradition.

The Church declares the Mother of Our Lord is Queen of Heaven → Hail Mary!

The answer to most stumbling blocks is lack of obedience, and disobedience is the root of evil.
 
40.png
gnome:
Didn’t He give His Church the authority …“whatever bound on earth also bound in Heaven”? How can such earthly institution bind things in Heaven 😉

We are bound to His Church’s teaching which includes the Scripture AND the Apostolic Oral Tradition.

The Church declares the Mother of Our Lord is Queen of Heaven → Hail Mary!

The answer to most stumbling blocks is lack of obedience, and disobedience is the root of evil.
So, blind obedience is acceptable?
 
40.png
gnome:
Didn’t He give His Church the authority …“whatever bound on earth also bound in Heaven”? How can such earthly institution bind things in Heaven 😉

We are bound to His Church’s teaching which includes the Scripture AND the Apostolic Oral Tradition.

The Church declares the Mother of Our Lord is Queen of Heaven → Hail Mary!

The answer to most stumbling blocks is lack of obedience, and disobedience is the root of evil.
So, blind obedience and faith are acceptable?
 
ahimsaman72,
the very best evidence that I can give relates to my post above. the fact that Jesus is King of kings and that Mary is inarguably His mother settles the whole issue Biblically in my mind when one looks into the position of the Queen Mother. The Hebrew term is “Giberah” and as I said, this just sort of seals the doctrine in my mind because it’s airtight.
You find it very clearly in 2nd Kings 2:19

The “Giberah”'s position was one of intercessor to the king for the “anawim” or the poor in spirit among the king’s subjects. That’s why we say that Mary demonstrated this function in John 2 at the wedding feast in Cana. It in no way diminishes God to provide us with another intercessor for our needs than it does for us to ask other believers to pray for us. the veneration of the Blessed Virgin is scriptural and totally Christ oriented, since her constant message is the same as at the feast in Cana, “Do whatever he tells you”
Pax vobiscum
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
So, blind obedience and faith are acceptable?
Surely you don’t see much blind obedience in this forum do you…I’d say we pretty well know why we believe the things we do and obey accordingly. If we lack anything it’s sometimes the ability to explain as clearly as we’d like since you haven’t had the benefit of all the reading and study we have done.
 
Church Militant:
ahimsaman72,
the very best evidence that I can give relates to my post above. the fact that Jesus is King of kings and that Mary is inarguably His mother settles the whole issue Biblically in my mind when one looks into the position of the Queen Mother. The Hebrew term is “Giberah” and as I said, this just sort of seals the doctrine in my mind because it’s airtight.
You find it very clearly in 2nd Kings 2:19

The “Giberah”'s position was one of intercessor to the king for the “anawim” or the poor in spirit among the king’s subjects. That’s why we say that Mary demonstrated this function in John 2 at the wedding feast in Cana. It in no way diminishes God to provide us with another intercessor for our needs than it does for us to ask other believers to pray for us. the veneration of the Blessed Virgin is scriptural and totally Christ oriented, since her constant message is the same as at the feast in Cana, “Do whatever he tells you”
Pax vobiscum
Some points we can agree on:
  1. Mary is the Lord’s mother
  2. It is possible for her to intercede for us as other saints can (agree?)
  3. She demonstrated the function of the “Giberah” at the wedding feast
Okay…let’s hypothetically say we both agree on these points. That still doesn’t get us to “Queen of heaven”. It is easily established that she was/is the Lord’s mother. Scripture surrounding His birth is clear.

She was a virgin. She gave birth to the Lord. She cared for Him throughout His childhood. She was “highly favored” among women. Yes, yes, yes. She is absolutely “special”.

Jesus was the rightful King of Israel. Even if we say that this automatically makes her “Queen”, doesn’t this still remain an earthly one? I don’t understand how she can spiritually rule.

I have no problem with venerating her. The difference would be that I would venerate her as the earthly mother of Christ and holy woman.

Would you say that she reigns alongside her Son and the Father in heaven where they all are? Since she has “Queenship”, does that mean she can “rule”?

Peace…
 
Church Militant:
Surely you don’t see much blind obedience in this forum do you…I’d say we pretty well know why we believe the things we do and obey accordingly. If we lack anything it’s sometimes the ability to explain as clearly as we’d like since you haven’t had the benefit of all the reading and study we have done.
Generally, folks here know their stuff. But, regrettably, there are those who have no idea. They have read the books, listened to the lectures - but when it comes to verifying what you just experienced - they don’t take the time. They point to another source without using their own God-given intelligence and ability to think for themselves.

I see it in those who do not know how to answer their faith. I see it in those (in my own denomination also) who nod the head - read the material - listen to the preacher/priest and say to themselves: “Well, that’s it. He said it. It must be true.” Or, well, my denomination believes it - so I believe it - without the personal investigation vested in proving it to be true.

I take nothing at face value. I don’t accept it because the preacher said it - my momma said it - my cousin said it - a guy 300 years ago believed it - no. Blind faith is not acceptable to me if it equates to “intellectual suicide”.

Blind faith is useless. Direct experience motivates and changes the heart. You can’t experience God by believing in a concept of God. The eucharist is a good example. You actually experience Christ when you celebrate mass. That is experiencing God. Talking about the mass is not the same as participating.

Peace…
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
So, blind obedience and faith are acceptable?
how can obeying Our Lord’s command (“whatever bound…”) be
blind obedience?
 
40.png
tuopaolo:
I would read what St Alphonsus Ligouri writes here:

sanpiodapietrelcina.org/english/glories.htm

I think this Saint and Doctor’s commentary on the Hail Holy Queen would be better than any offered here.

On the subject of Mary Most Holy as our hope, in addition to reading what Saint Alphonsus says, what St Maximilian Kolbe says here might be helpful too. From p. 120 of The Kolbe Reader:Sometimes when reading I grow irritated because the author takes such special pains to stress that our Lady is our whole hope “after Jesus.” Evidently this can be understood in a correct sense. However, the exaggerated scruple not to omit that “saving clause” – no doubt out of veneration of Jesus – is something I consider rather offensive to him.

Let’s argue from an example. When the flatbed presses proved insufficient, we got a rotary press; and we can rightly affirm that to print the Knight on time we put all our hope in the rotary press. But if every time someone were to add immediately, as though he were worried about it, “Yes, but only after the company that built it,” he would thereby show his belief that the machine might fail, and that we might need to have recourse to the firm [as our “hope”]. All this would show that the company had not build the machine as solidly as it ought to have done; and this would hardly be a compliment to the manufacturers.

So denying that Mary is our hope, rather than complimenting Jesus would actually be insulting Him.
Thank you for the link above. I could not stop reading the writings of St Alphonso Ligouri on the Glories of Mary. Tears came to my eyes as I read - so awesome and beautiful. Such deep insight, and light!
 
hey ahimsaman72, You know whats funny, you wanted proof from scripture, and I provided it complete with explanations for each verse…then I made the claim that Christians everywhere believed the same with tons of quotes from every century…so what more do you want? You asked for it, I provided it…and I’m not hiding behind anything. I’ve been reading these posts which have deviated from my original question, so I have wagered in on your debated, providing exactly what you wanted. That is not blind obedience, that scriptural proof, historical proof, good logic, and good reasoning. You never did bring up the point about the trinity…let me state it again: "There is no specific scripture to support that, but then again it’s not official dogma either. Just like the Trinity (which by the way is no where in scripture, it’s deduced by passages in scripture since scripture is materially sufficient and formally insufficient), it has the constant affirmation of all christians everywhere "
 
40.png
ahimsaman72:
I see it in those who do not know how to answer their faith. I see it in those (in my own denomination also) who nod the head - read the material - listen to the preacher/priest and say to themselves: “Well, that’s it. He said it. It must be true.” Or, well, my denomination believes it - so I believe it - without the personal investigation vested in proving it to be true.

I take nothing at face value.
We really don’t have to. Our denomination has already proved it “true”. That is what is so sad about your debating in here. You keep by passing the truth. The mistake you are making in this very judgemental observation is to wrongly think that the people you are debating with have not investigated these things for themselves. They seem like very well read individuals. They have not come this far without having done their homework.

When I have investigated and done these things you say we don’t do, I find the the Church’s teaching is correct. The people you are encountering here have done the same. That is why they are confident in sharing it with you.
 
Catholic Tom:
hey ahimsaman72, You know whats funny, you wanted proof from scripture, and I provided it complete with explanations for each verse…then I made the claim that Christians everywhere believed the same with tons of quotes from every century…so what more do you want? You asked for it, I provided it…and I’m not hiding behind anything. I’ve been reading these posts which have deviated from my original question, so I have wagered in on your debated, providing exactly what you wanted. That is not blind obedience, that scriptural proof, historical proof, good logic, and good reasoning. You never did bring up the point about the trinity…let me state it again: "There is no specific scripture to support that, but then again it’s not official dogma either. Just like the Trinity (which by the way is no where in scripture, it’s deduced by passages in scripture since scripture is materially sufficient and formally insufficient), it has the constant affirmation of all christians everywhere "
The big writing was hurting my eyes 🙂 so I had to tone it down a bit. What you provided was a pre-formed essay chock full of information that (again) cannot possibly be looked at and discussed. Are you prepared to discuss these point by point? You claim that you have given me tons of evidence. Just because you posted alot of information doesn’t equate to evidence.

I could refute every bit of that information by using sources such as Matthew Henry’s Commentary. I want YOU to plead your case for “Queen of heaven”, not a plethora of information you got from somewhere. Your very first post of “evidence” spoke about Mary being the Ark!

Your thread is titled, “Hail Holy Queen”. You’ve done nothing in relation to your topic.

Peace…
 
40.png
cove:
We really don’t have to. Our denomination has already proved it “true”. That is what is so sad about your debating in here. You keep by passing the truth. The mistake you are making in this very judgemental observation is to wrongly think that the people you are debating with have not investigated these things for themselves. They seem like very well read individuals. They have not come this far without having done their homework.

When I have investigated and done these things you say we don’t do, I find the the Church’s teaching is correct. The people you are encountering here have done the same. That is why they are confident in sharing it with you.
"our denomination has already proved it “true” is a typical response.

The same could be said by Mormons, The Church of Christ, Jehovah’s Witnesses, SDA’s, Baptists…you get the point. It’s easy to say such things. It’s almost impossible to prove it.

“you keep bypassing the truth” is another typical response that any denomination can say. And what is the truth?

This is empty rhetoric.

I debate with those who show the genuine interest. I share with those who want another viewpoint. I leave when dialogue is not possible.

So, adieu…

Peace…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top